karea_link_session

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It explains the linking action and what the user gets (history, resume command). However, it doesn't disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting previous links) or prerequisites (e.g., task must exist).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences: first states purpose and benefit, second gives usage direction, third provides concrete examples. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and outcome despite lacking an output schema. It explains what the user gains (history visibility and resume command). Could be slightly more explicit about return value if any, but sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds value by explaining how to obtain sessionId for each provider (e.g., 'Claude Code: the id from claude --resume'). This goes beyond the schema's generic description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states the action (link), the resource (AI coding session to Karea task), and the purpose (view session history and copy resume command). It distinguishes from siblings like karea_unlink_session and other task operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description says 'Call this once per task' and provides provider-specific instructions. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context makes it clear when to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.